8 ms·

> They should force Apple to allow alternative engines to Webkit I would be A-OK with that if the alternative engines provided the same privacy and security gu

> They should force Apple to allow alternative engines to Webkit I would be A-OK with that if the alternative engines provided the same privacy and security guarantees to me that Mobile Safari does (with penalties for breaching those guarantees.)

makeitdouble 5y ago
Those guarantees are currently provided by Apple and you seem to trust them. What would stop you from chosing alternative browsers from other companies you trust to provide the same guarantees ?
- sbuk 5y ago
  Google and Mozilla's track record? https://www.csoonline.com/article/3243284/firefox-users-are-ticked-after-mozilla-secretly-installed-mr-robot-add-on.html https://www.csoonline.com/article/3243284/firefox-users-are-... https://www.pcmag.com/archive/google-accused-of-tracking-safari-usage-without-permission-294281 https://www.pcmag.com/archive/google-accused-of-tracking-saf...
  - makeitdouble 5y ago
    Apple were heavily relying on Google and Yahoo from maps, integrated web search, to weather data for a long time. At no point they asked you if you wanted to give your location to Yahoo. Would you give a pass to Apple for how they handled privacy in the past and not to Mozilla who comparatively had only a few hiccups ?
    - sbuk 5y ago
      Let's leave the goalposts where they are. Besides, I'm extremely confident that Apple only ever used Google for mapping in the early days of iOS/iPhone OS. In which case, if you took the time to read the ToS, it's there.
      - makeitdouble 5y ago
        They stayed on Google Maps for 4~5 years until the writing was on the wall that it wouldn’t help them in the future (android being the elephant in the room). They still happily relied on whoever service they could rely on. Do you remember the facebook and twitter accounts setup directly in the system preferences ? Or right now they’re still sending data to Weatherchannel, until they complete Dark Sky’s integration I assume. Service providers where mostly in the deal to get user data, and Apple’s push on privacy only started well into Cook’s tenure. But you have trust in them in their current business position (it only was “the early days”). By that token I don’t think it’s unrealistic to assume at some point you’ll find other companies that are either new or show they changed enough to get your trust.
        sbuk 5y ago
        And they tell you this is happening. The links I shared illustrate Google and Mozilla doing things without asking or informing the user. Apple do indeed have form in this area too, battery/processor throttling springs to mind. With regards maps, although what this has to do with your original question is beyond me, Apple informed the user very clearly on where the data is from and what data they were collecting, they still do. It was originally a combination of TomTom and OpenStreetMap, by the way. Also, Jobs was pushing privacy in 2010 - "Privacy means people know what they're signing up for, in plain English and repeatedly. I believe people are smart and some people want to share more data than other people do. Ask them. Ask them every time. Make them tell you to stop asking them if they get tired of your asking them. Let them know precisely what you're going to do with their data." I agree that companies can change. Big companies rarely do. I'm concerned that it's only a matter of time before Mozilla make the decision to switch to blink, which would be the end for them and the open web. Interestingly, of the complaints made in this article, 6 are Editors Drafts, not agreed upon standards, or Working Drafts, again experimental un-agreed 'standards'. I'll concede that a working draft is close enough to being standardised. The rest, bar one, are implemented in WebKit. So the complaint in the article is that the WebKit project is holding up the web by not including Google's experimental features in a bid to say Apple should be allowing other, less secure rendering engines on a platform where users store a ridiculous amount of PII. It's being framed as 'freedom' - I'm sceptical. They'll be caterwauling about 'choice', but by enforcing 'choice', there is very real, and frankly sinister, risk that it will be lost irrevocably along with any semblance of an open web. Careful what you wish for.
saagarjha 5y ago
What kinds of penalties do you have in mind? Do you think Safari should be held up to the same standard other browsers are if they surpass it in security or privacy on any front?
- zimpenfish 5y ago
  > Do you think Safari should be held up to the same standard other browsers are if they surpass it in security or privacy on any front? Definitely.
_Algernon_ 5y ago
This is about forcing Apple to allow other engines. You can still choose not to use them. It follows that there is no reason that your choice of engine should be the default and only option for everyone that uses an iOS device.
- zimpenfish 5y ago
  > You can still choose not to use them. Not necessarily - if an app I am required to use for work chooses to use Chrome/whatever as its engine, for example, I don't have a choice there. Same for my bank / doctor / school / etc.
- yourenotsmart 5y ago
  Users can't make an informed choice about what browser engine they use. They don't understand what a browser engine is, and what impact it has on their security, battery performance and so on. So no, you can't choose. When we say "you can choose" we need to realize that this is only good when you can make an educated, informed choice. If you can't, you need to be protected. And that's Apple's role. Random choice is not a choice. Would you have your infant "choose" what drugs to take for headache for example? What criteria will they use? Pill shape, color, size and flavor. Well that's basically also our proverbial mom and pop picking a browser engine. Furthermore browser engines have this peculiar habit of getting into everything. Open any app at all and it's probably using WebKit without you realizing it. What if the app uses some random outdated fork of Netscape, why not? Do you realize what "choice" you made by opening that app? No.
  - agust 5y ago
    Yes, users can make an informed choice about what product to use or to buy. This is true for computers, this is true for mobile devices, this is true for any kind of software, and obviously this is true for web browsers. People have been doing it on all other OSes since web browsers have existed. There is no reason to prevent competition in such a market, and hopefully regulators will become aware of the issue and act on it soon.
    - 5y ago

makeitdouble 5y ago

Those guarantees are currently provided by Apple and you seem to trust them. What would stop you from chosing alternative browsers from other companies you trust to provide the same guarantees ?

sbuk 5y ago
Google and Mozilla's track record? https://www.csoonline.com/article/3243284/firefox-users-are-ticked-after-mozilla-secretly-installed-mr-robot-add-on.html https://www.csoonline.com/article/3243284/firefox-users-are-... https://www.pcmag.com/archive/google-accused-of-tracking-safari-usage-without-permission-294281 https://www.pcmag.com/archive/google-accused-of-tracking-saf...
- makeitdouble 5y ago
  Apple were heavily relying on Google and Yahoo from maps, integrated web search, to weather data for a long time. At no point they asked you if you wanted to give your location to Yahoo. Would you give a pass to Apple for how they handled privacy in the past and not to Mozilla who comparatively had only a few hiccups ?
  - sbuk 5y ago
    Let's leave the goalposts where they are. Besides, I'm extremely confident that Apple only ever used Google for mapping in the early days of iOS/iPhone OS. In which case, if you took the time to read the ToS, it's there.
    - makeitdouble 5y ago
      They stayed on Google Maps for 4~5 years until the writing was on the wall that it wouldn’t help them in the future (android being the elephant in the room). They still happily relied on whoever service they could rely on. Do you remember the facebook and twitter accounts setup directly in the system preferences ? Or right now they’re still sending data to Weatherchannel, until they complete Dark Sky’s integration I assume. Service providers where mostly in the deal to get user data, and Apple’s push on privacy only started well into Cook’s tenure. But you have trust in them in their current business position (it only was “the early days”). By that token I don’t think it’s unrealistic to assume at some point you’ll find other companies that are either new or show they changed enough to get your trust.
      - sbuk 5y ago
        And they tell you this is happening. The links I shared illustrate Google and Mozilla doing things without asking or informing the user. Apple do indeed have form in this area too, battery/processor throttling springs to mind. With regards maps, although what this has to do with your original question is beyond me, Apple informed the user very clearly on where the data is from and what data they were collecting, they still do. It was originally a combination of TomTom and OpenStreetMap, by the way. Also, Jobs was pushing privacy in 2010 - "Privacy means people know what they're signing up for, in plain English and repeatedly. I believe people are smart and some people want to share more data than other people do. Ask them. Ask them every time. Make them tell you to stop asking them if they get tired of your asking them. Let them know precisely what you're going to do with their data." I agree that companies can change. Big companies rarely do. I'm concerned that it's only a matter of time before Mozilla make the decision to switch to blink, which would be the end for them and the open web. Interestingly, of the complaints made in this article, 6 are Editors Drafts, not agreed upon standards, or Working Drafts, again experimental un-agreed 'standards'. I'll concede that a working draft is close enough to being standardised. The rest, bar one, are implemented in WebKit. So the complaint in the article is that the WebKit project is holding up the web by not including Google's experimental features in a bid to say Apple should be allowing other, less secure rendering engines on a platform where users store a ridiculous amount of PII. It's being framed as 'freedom' - I'm sceptical. They'll be caterwauling about 'choice', but by enforcing 'choice', there is very real, and frankly sinister, risk that it will be lost irrevocably along with any semblance of an open web. Careful what you wish for.

saagarjha 5y ago

What kinds of penalties do you have in mind? Do you think Safari should be held up to the same standard other browsers are if they surpass it in security or privacy on any front?

zimpenfish 5y ago
> Do you think Safari should be held up to the same standard other browsers are if they surpass it in security or privacy on any front? Definitely.

_Algernon_ 5y ago

This is about forcing Apple to allow other engines. You can still choose not to use them. It follows that there is no reason that your choice of engine should be the default and only option for everyone that uses an iOS device.

zimpenfish 5y ago
> You can still choose not to use them. Not necessarily - if an app I am required to use for work chooses to use Chrome/whatever as its engine, for example, I don't have a choice there. Same for my bank / doctor / school / etc.
yourenotsmart 5y ago
Users can't make an informed choice about what browser engine they use. They don't understand what a browser engine is, and what impact it has on their security, battery performance and so on. So no, you can't choose. When we say "you can choose" we need to realize that this is only good when you can make an educated, informed choice. If you can't, you need to be protected. And that's Apple's role. Random choice is not a choice. Would you have your infant "choose" what drugs to take for headache for example? What criteria will they use? Pill shape, color, size and flavor. Well that's basically also our proverbial mom and pop picking a browser engine. Furthermore browser engines have this peculiar habit of getting into everything. Open any app at all and it's probably using WebKit without you realizing it. What if the app uses some random outdated fork of Netscape, why not? Do you realize what "choice" you made by opening that app? No.
- agust 5y ago
  Yes, users can make an informed choice about what product to use or to buy. This is true for computers, this is true for mobile devices, this is true for any kind of software, and obviously this is true for web browsers. People have been doing it on all other OSes since web browsers have existed. There is no reason to prevent competition in such a market, and hopefully regulators will become aware of the issue and act on it soon.
  - 5y ago